Assignment for Last Class • Remember questions you had about Seth’s presentation • Choice of Law in the European Union • Rome I (contracts) (Handout pp. 1-3) • Rome II (torts) (Handout pp. 4-6) • Wall v Mutuelle (Handout pp. 7-11) • Hillside v Baasland (Handout pp. 12-14) • Questions on next slides • Optional • Hoffheimer (2nd edition) Chapter 25
Rome I and Rome II • Are the rules of Rome I and Rome II more like the traditional rules or the modern approaches? • In what specifics are the rules similar to the results likely under U.S. choice of law? • In what specifics, are they different from US choice of law? • Gottesman thinks any uniform system of choice of law would be better than the current system in the US. Would you agree that enacting the EU rules in the US would be better than the current system? • Are there any specific changes you would advocate to Rome I and Rome II before enacting them in the US? • Do you think litigation under Rome I and Rome II is likely to be more predictable than in the US? • Do you think litigation under Rome I and Rome II is likely to be fairer than in the US?
EU Cases • Wall v Mutuelle • How would this case have come out if it were litigated in the US? • Even if the result would have been the same, how would the opinion likely have been different? • Hillside v Baasland • Can you use the same legal materials (Rome I and II) to argue for the opposite outcome? • Norway is not a member of the EU, and Rome I and Rome II do not apply there. If Rome I and Rome II applied in Norway, and if Baasland had sued Hillside in Norway to reclaim its money do you think the Norwegian court would have reached the same decision on choice of law? • How would this case have come out if it were litigated in the US